| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stay at home.
Everybody wins!
OGL is what has made PF possible, and what it thrives on. Lets show some respect. PF supports 3PP, and 3PP supports PF. The only thing that's not being supportive here is us... *lights candle and sings kumbaya*
The books are written assuming that players are going to be decent with the rules, not with the assumption that every Pathfinder player is a Card Carrying Cheese Weasel that has to be slapped on the wrist with every other paragraph. +1 Whenever someone posts a new epic build, combination or anything else you can bet the developers were probably not aware of the combination, or the disillusioned reading of the rule. Many times when we write these rules, we think they're clear as day. Sometimes you feel any feat requires 2-pages of additional content just so that others don't purposely bend the meaning of any word or phrase. There's always little white lies, small leaps in logic, minor added phrases, little overlooked sentences or otherwise ignorance of intent in so many posts and builds. This is why we have a GM though, a neutral arbiter that knows when the wool is being pulled. I prefer a GM that will be fair but firm. If they have a GM that allows such loose interpretations, more power to them. If they're having fun, go ahead. I'm just glad I'm not them.
I understand the apprehension with 4-5 distinctly independently made characters. It is difficult. What I find most difficult is that some players insist on making lone-wolf characters. Completely neutral and never wanting to take a stand on issues characters. Also, the ever elusive trouble making character (in various forms). Getting them on-board, realistically, is always a headache of a challenge even with back-stories. I think it's a good suggestion if the players go for it. The players do have the right to enjoy the character made, and if this is not how they would like it, then some other choice/alternative would have to be done. I just try to sit down with them, let them know the realm and ask them questions and help provide direction. In the end, I prefer group positive characters over group negative. Just makes life easier.
18-20 x2 is double damage 30% of the time (keened). 19-20 x3 is triple damage 20% of the time (keened). They work out to be the same on paper. However, I would choose the greater range to even out the damage. You only deal damage when you hit, and it's better to hit more often than simply to multiply your damage by more. Except in the case of DR, but if you're serious about dealing damage, you should have a tactic to get around it. It should be noted that most of the time, only some of the damage is actually multiplied. Precision damage and such (without extra help) is not multiplied. This just increases the reason to take a better hit rate over a higher multiplier, as you're not doing triple all of the damage, only some of it. Therefore, you are not truly dealing 50% more damage with a x3 multiplier over the x2. You're tripling the multipliable damage, and simply adding the same non-multipliable damage to both, skewing the math. The only thing that would move me from an 18-20 x2, is an 18-20 x3 or better, or a 19-20 x4 or better. As far as I know, such weapons don't exist in PF. Conclusion, go for consistency.
Look to 3PP, Boggles are nice (A goblin with a boost to Int) or look at a High Goblin (additional free boost to Wis). Go with no armor, there's a feat that doubles your dex to AC, just go for a 22 Dex. There's several viable ways to play sans-armor. Play to the races strengths, hide and such, and just know the line you're walking. Paladin's have to be good, but they don't have to be dumb so just play smart and use some combat feinting and such. I don't think the CHA hit is a big deal (I've never enjoyed the CHA related abilities of a pally much anyway) and the whole concept is flavour country, so just go with it. I would only avoid it if your table power-games and you're afraid of falling behind the curve.
All I can say is read the post again. We all agree they are bloodline, they just aren't 'sorcerer bloodlines'. We're not adding 'mutant', the table specifically identifies them as 'mutant bloodlines'. Period...
I still don't understand what people are arguing about. Wildblooded bloodlines are still bloodlines. I don't even understand the arguement that a bloodline is not, in fact, a bloodline. I think this is why you're having trouble following the conversation. Eldritch Heritage - Benefit: Select one sorcerer bloodline. First, you are not given access to bloodlines, you are given access to a sorcerer bloodline. They are located under sorcerer bloodlines list in the base Sorcerer class. The bloodlines given access through the Wildblooded archetype are mutated bloodlines. Eldritch heritage gives you access to a sorcerer bloodline, not a mutated bloodline. By your own assertion the words used dictate access, and as you see, the eldritch heritage feat says nothing about mutated bloodline. Thus, it does not give you access to them by their exemption from the feat. You are absolutely correct, they are both bloodlines however only the list located in the sorcerer class list are sorcerer bloodlines, and thus they are what, by wording, are provided access by the eldritch heritage feat.
Successful Troll suggest fellow poster not metagame so much.*gasp* TROLL!I swear. It's like people don't even think anymore.An excellent example. *gasp* TROLLS!
The thing with Pathfinder and other fantasy type games is the fact that healing is fairly common so leaving someone that is wounded is a chance for that person to be up again in no time and kill you. I agree. There's tons of reasons to kill someone who is down. GM's and players just don't think. I find it's hard to find one even willing to put themselves in the NPC's shoes. The evil maniacal wizard simply might not even care if it's risky to take the 6 seconds to finish off a character. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to CE! The person may be faking it, throwing the old bluff out there. Only one way to be sure... Anything with animal intelligence is going to make sure what they attack is dead. They simply don't have combat tactics. Finally, an intelligent evil player may have already assessed that the battle is going against him, so he stabs the player one more time and runs. It's better for the next encounter to fight one less player. I swear. It's like people don't even think anymore.
The more you fudge death in the game, the less realistic it becomes. If your players are getting into situations and you continuously have to bail them out by fudging dice, lying about damage and having the enemies unrealistically walking away then you take away from any role-playing involved. If you want to play PF on the super-easy setting that your sister plays video games on, then that's your business. I prefer to play a realistic game on a realistic setting. But hey, that's just me. If the BBEG, based on intelligence, nature and motive would kill someone, then do it. If you want to lie and pretend he has 1 intelligence, or take away his natural 20 and re-roll it, your choice. If you want your players at level 10, fighting at CR 8, then fine. To each his own.
When I read the title I laughed a lot. Yeah, what everyone else said.
Well, we can tell this is important enough to look outside for advice. My initial response is negative, but the optimal solution is one that benefits you, him and the group. You MUST pull him aside and talk to him. You also need to set an agenda for what you will do, and what he will do. You need to tell him the truth, that as a group (and you as a DM) [honesty is the best policy] are feeling he isn't fitting in well with the campaign. Nobody wants him to stop playing, but that it's obvious he isn't interacting well in game, and out of game. You should tell him that he needs to: 1) Be patient. If he is not there, or it is not his turn, he must allow the game to play on and you will simply be ignoring anything he says and continuing with the game if it happens. 2) Not to play others characters. He needs to trust that you as a GM know where the dark black line of too much/not enough is. Anything below it is up to the players to play. That means a Lawful Good Paladin choosing who does or does not get healed. 3) He must get familiar with his character. If you need to go over it with him, then you will, and others will help if needed. However, he needs to start becoming an independent player. It's frustrating and detracts from the feel of the game when he doesn't understand most of what is going on. This includes getting to know basic PF rules. You need to let him know he'll have time to change, and the group wants to work with him for it. If he does not, then he won't be allowed to keep playing. Be honest, firm and fair.
The point value of adding two extra arms is almost the equivalent adding half a new race... I think this logic alone implies they aren't there to hold torches and scratch your ass. I think the original interpretations are correct, all the same penalties but with 4 arms and one is primary.
The PF community is an untapped resource that works tirelessly and for free. We also happen to be the customer base... Wouldn't it make sense that we are able to dedicate our volunteer hours to pushing edits through and assisting in interaction appraisal? Just seems smart business to put such a model forward...
If you do, your rage immediately ends, and you are fatigued (even if you would not normally be) If this is not an exception to an immunity... then what is it? You would only not normally be fatigued if you were unable to be affected by it. Being immune makes you unable to be affected by it. When a statement says, though you would not normally be effected by it, ignore this, and proceed to be effected by it, then this is an exception to an exception. +1 for being fatigued.
Stop crafting stuff for people, and ask for a kickback on that sundered weapon. Working as a team is good and all, but you're getting used. You need to toughen up and say no (your character does too).
Well, there's a reason slavery exists in very few countries in almost any realm you can think of. It is really the exception to the rule, and as others said, Pathfinder is built on the morality epicentre of today, not in the day where it was 'commonplace'. That is the misconception here. The average player in Pathfinder of any alignment is aware that the removal of a persons rights, against their will, not for the fair use of crime and punishment is evil. The only realm I can even think of that had any level of slavery beyond miniscule is Dark Sun, and even then it was about 50/50 between cities that used slavery and free cities. I think that statement alone ends the discussion. It is rare, because it is rarely accepted. It is rarely accepted because it is evil and almost never accepted by a general populace that isn't considered either 1) barbaric, or 2) highly evil/corrupt. Dark Sun of course is overflowing with both of these, thus its high level of accepted slavery. Anything else is an outlier. |